Please please please is there a way to prove multi-dead dunkings? And I don't just things like the Founding Fathers BS story, I mean enough to prove it's not a clerical error here and there; enough thousands to shake up TBM's and show how much wasted time has been used for this duplicity....

Thoughts?

I'm pretty sure some temple workers in the church have said this happens? That might not be proof, but certainly strong evidence.

I don't think most TBMs would feel like it's a waste of their time though. Most of them will still want to go to the temple even if there's no work to do.

I have read, someplace, that now that it's all on computer, they will catch duplicate names and dates.

I have heard that it's not uncommon to reuse those lists from temple to temple.
I don't know the reasoning. Maybe they think the temple person doing the "work" is not really worthy so it has to be done again?

Temple workers, generally consider it a blessing to do this "work for the dead."

Seniors, for instance, will often be given a "calling" to go to the temple and live in one of the apartments (if they have them) and do temple sessions for six months or so. They go to the temple every weekday (six days-I'm not sure) for several hours.

In that past, the Stakes were assigned certain times to do the different sessions: baptisms,(youngsters do these), washing and anointing, endowment. Those are done separately for the dead.

They are all done at the same time (washing and anointing and endowment) the first time the person goes to the temple.

That's how I remember it.

Can you imagine if all those hours were spent doing something that was actually useful, like working in a soup kitchen or something?

My grandfather is in the IGI TWICE at the Mormon genealogy website, so I can only assume his "work" got done at least twice. The same username is listed on both occasions. I'm not sure why or if this person duplicated the "work", but there is more than one. Since one person is listed on both, one can assume it wasn't a clerical error.

How many new names would be needed every day in order to supply temple patrons with new names for every temple session?

141 temples x Number of endowment rooms per temple x Number of sessions per day x Number of people in each session = Number of new names needed each day.

How many endowment rooms do temples have? 4-6?
How many sessions each day? 3-6
How many members in each session? 10-40?

141 x 4 x 3 x 10 = 16,920
141 x 6 x 6 x 40 = 203,040

Assuming temples are closed on Sunday, that comes to 5,295,960-104,159,520 a year. Do you really think that, even with the genealogy library, the church can generate that many new names?

We should do the same type of prank that a fraternity did to Stanford University. They bought a large mule, and gave it a nice-sounding name, and great high school records, and registered it as a freshman. The frat took turns attending the classes, and on graduation day, they led the donkey, in a cap and gown across the stage to receive his diploma, proving that any jackass can graduate from Stanford.

Anyway, we could come up with several lists of great family names, and official information, and submit them to the Mormon Church. I suspect they would be so thrilled to get these new names, that they wouldn't put too much effort into verifying the information. Wealthy-sounding names would excite them the most, such as, Gerard Wimbledon III, Benjamin Roosevelt, Sr.

LOL. This should be easy...maybe already done. With no interest in saving ancestors I have looked at old death records and census, historical society geneologies etc and am amazed at how inaccurate the info is - how some people are born, say, one year in their death record but born ten years earlier in another record. So my guess is some people already have been baptised as two separate individuals. Mormons seem to have the same faith in these records as they do in the BoM, or maybe they are sure it will all get sorted out in Heaven,

They got in trouble for doing Anne Frank - both times. That should be documented in the media as well as the CULT's "apology".



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/07/2013 07:13PM by ozpoof.